If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

Considering that even if the Pacers wanted to gut the payroll they couldn't do it until 2011, and that if they simply let all the deals expire and bring in vet-minimum players to team with Danny and the "young guys" (whose contracts also will be running out a year later and who might very well have something to say at FA time about being handed teammates who clearly are only there for profit and not winning), it isn't very constructive to talk about that as a solution for the problem right now.

For any business, if your facilities costs are this large a portion of your costs - I'd guess 18% which is huge considering the bloated portion of the budget taken up by player salaries in the NBA - you HAVE to look at those costs and do what you can to reduce them. You don't just say, "oh, well, those are costs every business has, guess we look somewhere else." You also look at what comparable businesses are doing (like the Colts and the LOS deal) and try for the same thing.

BillS

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

The sports teams have made a positive contribution to the downtown culture, I admit that happily. But you can't just say, "Look at downtown!" and conclude that the sports teams did all that.

But you also can't look at the other things without the sports teams and say they would have done it on their own, especially when just one or two of any of these things have failed to revitalize other downtowns.

The important thing was that there was actually a PLAN that brought all these things together downtown. The way the sports stadiums were lined out, the development of Circle Center, the constant addition of new hotel rooms, the expansion of the Convention Center, it wasn't really just a haphazard "hey, my dad has a mall group, let's put on a retail center!"

BillS

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

But you also can't look at the other things without the sports teams and say they would have done it on their own, especially when just one or two of any of these things have failed to revitalize other downtowns.

The important thing was that there was actually a PLAN that brought all these things together downtown. The way the sports stadiums were lined out, the development of Circle Center, the constant addition of new hotel rooms, the expansion of the Convention Center, it wasn't really just a haphazard "hey, my dad has a mall group, let's put on a retail center!"

Certainly. That's what I'm trying to say.

And the plan goes further back than most people realize, to William Hudnut.

Hudnut's policies were entrepreneurial, and he hoped to attract economic development by taking risks with raising taxes and issuing bonds. He opposed deficit spending and kept the city's bond rating at AAA. He aimed for job growth, a widened tax base, and law and order. The city spent large amounts on tax incentives, infrastructure improvements, and development projects to attract business to the downtown area.

Over the sixteen years of his term, more than 30 major building projects took place downtown, including renovations and expansions to Monument Circle, Indianapolis Union Station, Indiana University School of Medicine, and the Indiana Convention Center. Many office buildings were constructed, and companies such as Eli Lilly and American United Life committed to staying in Indianapolis.

Indianapolis is known as the Amateur Sports Capital of the World, due in part to Hudnut's efforts of marketing the city. While mayor, Indianapolis held the 1987 Pan American Games and the 1982 National Sports Festival. Hudnut formed the Indiana Sports Corporation, which directed sporting projects such as the Indianapolis Tennis Center, Major Taylor Velodrome, and the IUPUI Natatorium. In 1980 Hudnut formed a committee on building a new stadium to attract an NFL team. With the newly-built Hoosier Dome and other incentives, he secretly negotiated with then-Colts owner Robert Irsay to bring the Indianapolis Colts to Indianapolis from Baltimore.

And I won't be here to see the dayIt all dries up and blows awayI'd hang around just to seeBut they never had much use for meIn Levelland. (James McMurtry)

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

Considering that even if the Pacers wanted to gut the payroll they couldn't do it until 2011, and that if they simply let all the deals expire and bring in vet-minimum players to team with Danny and the "young guys" (whose contracts also will be running out a year later and who might very well have something to say at FA time about being handed teammates who clearly are only there for profit and not winning), it isn't very constructive to talk about that as a solution for the problem right now.

For any business, if your facilities costs are this large a portion of your costs - I'd guess 18% which is huge considering the bloated portion of the budget taken up by player salaries in the NBA - you HAVE to look at those costs and do what you can to reduce them. You don't just say, "oh, well, those are costs every business has, guess we look somewhere else." You also look at what comparable businesses are doing (like the Colts and the LOS deal) and try for the same thing.

If rent is 15 million, how much of that is offset by non pacer related events and how much that generates? What is their true rent expense?
Apparently non pacer revenue must be significant if they want us to pay their rent AND keep
non pacer revenue.
Do you think we should give then everything they want to keep them here?
There needs to be some pushback from the city to the Pacers and they can push back to
the labor agreement currently in place.

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

There needs to be some pushback from the city to the Pacers and they can push back to
the labor agreement currently in place.

I think the Pacers pushing back on the labor agreement will do exactly nothing. As long as it doesn't hurt New York, LA, or any Hype Player, the NBA really doesn't care.

I think Stern would be just as happy to drop the NBA to half the teams. As long as there are 2 in NYC, 2 in LA, and one each in Boston, Toronto ("international", you see), Chicago, Dallas, Miami, and Mouseville ... er ... Orlando, there could be a few more scattered as cannon fodder across the US.

BillS

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

Someone will probably have to type it out, Buck. It's entirety is not online at all.

Scan it!

With the right software it can even be scanned into a document that could just be cut and pasted...

Assuming PD allows it.

...But I no longer get the print edition of the Star so I can't do it. I would still subscribe but they no longer deliver where I am (and I'm not getting the mailed version because of the delay and extra $$$... I would still subscribe tho but I guess it was easier for them to drop me than pick up a few new subscribers out my way).

Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

------

"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

I haven't read all of this post but everyone does realize that if the pacers move the CIB will be responsible for operating costs of Conseco fieldhouse right? IF the pacers leave that means the CIB must generate 41 events to replace the 41 home games. Either way the bottle shakes the CIB is going to have to pay for the stadium, so why not pay for it with 41 guaranteed events a year with the Pacers. I just feel everyone has jumped ship and is riding the Colts right now..but I try to remind everyone that there is NO GUARANTEE that the Colts wont be average again once Manning retires and if the Pacers leave and we are an average Colts team again fans will leave and revenue for the city will be greatly impacted. I know it seems selfish of the PACERS to request this but it is fair as well. Our city of Indianapolis has built up the city along with the Pacers/Colts help no need to ruin something so magical as what the city has now. I say pay the operating costs and reap the benefit of all involved. But what do I know

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

With the looming lockout on the horizon, I expect the NBA teams to receive a sweetheart deal. Stern has already said that the 57% share will go down, probably not the 43% he's seeking but likely at least to the 50% threshold. Stern is also looking at capping players salaries at a max of 13 million. I expect it will be 15 million. The Pacers will be in a much better financial condition after the lockout.

"He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

but everyone does realize that if the pacers move the CIB will be responsible for operating costs of Conseco fieldhouse right? IF the pacers leave that means the CIB must generate 41 events to replace the 41 home games. Either way the bottle shakes the CIB is going to have to pay for the stadium, so why not pay for it with 41 guaranteed events a year with the Pacers. I just feel everyone has jumped ship and is riding the Colts right now..but I try to remind everyone that there is NO GUARANTEE that the Colts wont be average again once Manning retires and if the Pacers leave and we are an average Colts team again fans will leave and revenue for the city will be greatly impacted. I know it seems selfish of the PACERS to request this but it is fair as well. Our city of Indianapolis has built up the city along with the Pacers/Colts help no need to ruin something so magical as what the city has now. I say pay the operating costs and reap the benefit of all involved. But what do I know

After you read this thread, where do you propose the City of Indianapolis come up with the 15 mil the CIB doesn't have? How is the City of Indianapolis suppose to generate the 15 mil? If City doesn't have the money, how do you expect them to pay it? They aren't like the Federal Gov't that can just print some money when the need arises with the promise the US Gov't backs up the money. Someone is going to have to pay for what Herb Simon wants to not have to pay. I'm not planning on being one of them. I got stuck against my wishes with the Colts. I have no desire to do it again. Burnt once twice shy, been there done that, thanks but no thanks.

The Pacers and Colts are the reason for the first bullet and a contributing factor to the second. But they are immaterial to the other types of development, which sum up to far more than the sports teams can account for.

The sports teams have made a positive contribution to the downtown culture, I admit that happily. But you can't just say, "Look at downtown!" and conclude that the sports teams did all that.

My argument would be that as you admit that they were the first thing going on to spur the development, do you really want it to be the start of a negative trend?

I mean it would be a historic media frenzy if we allow them to leave. Just a lot of bad press, and the last thing you want is to start a negative trend of this magnitude. It also would hurt the potential of additional revenue a winning Pacers could bring. What happens if Lucas Oil Ever sits empty? It's nice to have a 41 game and playoffs tax revenue coming in. They should just put an additional ticket tax for all events held at Conseco if they have to.

The Pacers are the whole reason Conseco ever became a reality. I would have to say Conseco is a good thing for downtown Indy.

Indianapolis isn't Seattle or LA. It can't afford to loose an NBA or an NFL franchise.

On the other hand, Simon is one of the richest men in the world and he can afford it. He better only sell the team to someone who wants to keep it here if he can't make a profit with it. I mean it seems if the CIB gives in on the 15 million, the Pacers should have to pay like a 5 million of it. So that way the Pacers only have to make 10 million in profit next year to break even, and so does the CIB. The Pacers could easily recoup 10 million by being that much under the salary in 2011. The CIB could recoup the money by applying a "sin tax" on all tickets sold downtown. You want to attend the Colts game? Well here is 3 dollar charge on your ticket.

With the sweet deal the Colts got, the CIB should have to add a sin tax to the tickets sold downtown to cover its expenses at Conseco while giving the Pacers a viable deal.

Really what are the options? Pay 10 mil, and make the Pacers pay 5 for a lease? Or pay 15 and lose all the revenue the Pacers bring along with it? I mean the net loss in real numbers would be much higher any way you slice it. The city's hand are tied here.

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

After you read this thread, where do you propose the City of Indianapolis come up with the 15 mil the CIB doesn't have? How is the City of Indianapolis suppose to generate the 15 mil? If City doesn't have the money, how do you expect them to pay it? They aren't like the Federal Gov't that can just print some money when the need arises with the promise the US Gov't backs up the money. Someone is going to have to pay for what Herb Simon wants to not have to pay. I'm not planning on being one of them. I got stuck against my wishes with the Colts. I have no desire to do it again. Burnt once twice shy, been there done that, thanks but no thanks.

Supposing you live in Indianapolis or the surrounding counties, where is it you plan to move so you can be far enough away from the tax implications this will cause? Most likely has to be 2 counties away from Indy if the donut counties get involved, and with State getting involved in this, it will most likely drag the donut counties into paying for his. So where you gonna move to? I hear Anderson is a great place to live....LOL!

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

I think the Pacers pushing back on the labor agreement will do exactly nothing. As long as it doesn't hurt New York, LA, or any Hype Player, the NBA really doesn't care.

I think Stern would be just as happy to drop the NBA to half the teams. As long as there are 2 in NYC, 2 in LA, and one each in Boston, Toronto ("international", you see), Chicago, Dallas, Miami, and Mouseville ... er ... Orlando, there could be a few more scattered as cannon fodder across the US.

I know Stern is smarter than that. If your scenario happens there are going to be a whole lot of players out there looking for something to do. Time to start the ABA again.

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

I really dont' see how the players have any leverage what so ever. There are so many players living pay check to pay check (imagine that) and so many players who dream it is to play in the league, they would never think of destroying their chances so Lebron and company can make 20 million for 7 years guaranteed. heck after a year they could just hold a new draft could they not?

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

Stop referencing the "sweetheart deal" the Colts negotiated. That is an independent and situation that is not related to the facts at hand. This negotiation is between the CIB and the Pacers; not the Colts, CIB, and Pacers...

The Following User Says Thank You to Stryder For This Useful Post:

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

Kravitz's Sunday Editorial
Pacers' mess is their problem, not ours

There's never a good time for a multimilion-dollar business to beg the public for a heaping slice of corporate welfare. But consider now the timing of Your Indiana Pacers, who, while continuing to plead poverty for most of the past three decades, have finally come out and said; If you don't help us by the end of June, we're going to ook at our options, including relocation.
Yes,Great timing.
Our pubic schools are a mess.
Unemployment is hitting double digits.
Our infrastructure is crumbling.
And these folks at the Pacers-people with six- and seven-figure salaries,all kinds of perks and the petty cash to pay the likes of do-little advisers Stedman Graham and Calvin Hill-are going to hold the city for ransom?
They have the gall to come to the CIB, aready cut to the bone by cutbacks in recent years, and insist on help in paying more than $15 million a year to run Conseco Fieldhouse?
Of course they do.
Because that's how teams operate.
Except here's the rub: After speaking with a haf-dozen people involved in this mess, I've concuded the city is inclined to tell the Pacers to shove it, to call their bluff.
(Cue hearty applause)
As things now stand, the CIB said it is willing to take over the operation of the building,but understandably has certain conditions is wants affixed:
First , CIB officials want control of the building, which would help them in myriad financial ways. Their dollar, their facility, right? But the Pacers, at least for now, won't move. They want control, want their own people running the place, and neither side has yet budged.

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

I know Stern is smarter than that. If your scenario happens there are going to be a whole lot of players out there looking for something to do. Time to start the ABA again.

I don't think a consolidation of the nba market from 30 to fewer teams is a bad idea at all. If it is true that many small market teams are just not profitable then serially rotating nba teams through small markets is like the circus coming to your town but will be leaving soon- think Charlotte, OKc, Memphis, NJ, and Indy.

Stern is probably looking international and will put together a European conference that at some point in a post-season have superbowl type games with the nba conference. In other words broaden the appeal and compete only in markets that can sustain big revenues. Too many small market teams are sustained by the personal losses of owners who may write off the debt with other businesses. Now that Herb is the only owner he may not be too happy to absorb all the red ink previously shared by Mel.

Incidentally, the Star would be hurt badly if the pacers left town. Lots of people read the Star only for sports and if nothing is happening in Feb. readership will go down.

Re: Star Editorial: City should stand up to Pacers

Kravitz cont...

Second, there's the issue of revenues. The CIB-again,understandaby-believes it's entitled to some or all of the non-Pacers related revenues that come from Conseco. The Pacers seem to beileve the CIB should pay the mortage on their house and they should enjoy all the equity that acrues. You cannot beg for help and dictate the terms of the bailout at the same time. Not the way it works. Fine, then. Move. Good luck. See how Seattle is coming on a replacement for key arena. Do a feasibility study on Kansas City, Missouri and tell me how you're going to make money in a small market that already has the Royals and the Chiefs. Line up all the prospective franchise buyers who want to be part of a league where almost everybody is bleeding money. Show me all the cities who would be willing to pay the fifty million dollars necessary to break the Conseco lease- although Pacers president Jim Morris has claimed in private meetings that a new owner could sever the lease without paying a significant penalty. Let me put this simply: If a basketball franchise in Indiana can't make it, especially in a jewel of a new building that is the envy of the league, that is a YOU problem, and not an US problem. If you lose money 28 of 30 years, including every year with near sell-outs at a new building through the early 2000s, that says everything about your business inefficiencies and ineptitude and nothing about the tax-payers.